EGM on 17:14 - Nov 20 with 5183 views | isitme |
So from the article you have linked I assume that the council are not playing nicely? Maybe someone who is on Twitter could tweet our MP and see what his reaction is? | | | |
EGM on 17:17 - Nov 20 with 5162 views | bennersdale | It looked like hornets had a big meeting upstairs in the flying horse on Tuesday evening. Who should walk through the pub going to said meeting other than Mr Allen Brett. Maybe there is some movement on the sale of shares | |
| Hasta el valle abajo de la cerveza |
| |
EGM on 17:24 - Nov 20 with 5128 views | Daley_Lama | I would rather we wait and see rather than debate this for a month. Here's hoping for a merry Xmas! | |
| |
EGM on 17:42 - Nov 20 with 5065 views | 1mark1 | Hopefully now the club has put forward an offer that is acceptable to us Council Tax payers as well as us supporters. | |
| |
EGM on 21:25 - Nov 20 with 4780 views | R17ALE |
EGM on 17:42 - Nov 20 by 1mark1 | Hopefully now the club has put forward an offer that is acceptable to us Council Tax payers as well as us supporters. |
Don't know if you know him 1mark1, but council big wig, Mark Widdup was in the away end at Port Vale. I've seen him at a few Dale games, so you'd think he was Dale friendly. Could he have influence on the outcome of the stadium shares? I'm guessing you know a lot more than me on the structure of local politics! | |
| |
EGM on 22:47 - Nov 20 with 4637 views | 1mark1 |
EGM on 21:25 - Nov 20 by R17ALE | Don't know if you know him 1mark1, but council big wig, Mark Widdup was in the away end at Port Vale. I've seen him at a few Dale games, so you'd think he was Dale friendly. Could he have influence on the outcome of the stadium shares? I'm guessing you know a lot more than me on the structure of local politics! |
I know of him, but don't actually know him. I would not necessarily think he would have any influence, though he MIGHT have some input as advice, depending on his actual role. Up to about couple a months ago (around the time of Jim Dobbin's death), Dale had NOT put forward an acceptable offer to the Council. They had offered to buy the shares and clear the debt to the Council, but NOT with the FULL cash up front, basically wanting to pay over a period of time. This was MY UNDERSTANDING of what I was told. In principal the Council are/were happy to release the shares so long as Hornets have a guaranteed right to play with a contract, and the tax payers of Rochdale get a fair price/deal. From what I could understand, the Council are NOT or would not be allowed to just wipe out the Stadium company debts/loan. Also they have to obtain something that resembles a fair market price for the shares, legally. In my opinion they should get a fair price and get a proper settlement of the debt/loans, for us tax payers. | |
| | Login to get fewer ads
EGM on 10:00 - Nov 21 with 4394 views | CockneyDale |
EGM on 22:47 - Nov 20 by 1mark1 | I know of him, but don't actually know him. I would not necessarily think he would have any influence, though he MIGHT have some input as advice, depending on his actual role. Up to about couple a months ago (around the time of Jim Dobbin's death), Dale had NOT put forward an acceptable offer to the Council. They had offered to buy the shares and clear the debt to the Council, but NOT with the FULL cash up front, basically wanting to pay over a period of time. This was MY UNDERSTANDING of what I was told. In principal the Council are/were happy to release the shares so long as Hornets have a guaranteed right to play with a contract, and the tax payers of Rochdale get a fair price/deal. From what I could understand, the Council are NOT or would not be allowed to just wipe out the Stadium company debts/loan. Also they have to obtain something that resembles a fair market price for the shares, legally. In my opinion they should get a fair price and get a proper settlement of the debt/loans, for us tax payers. |
Fascinating. Sounds like we really do need a cup run! | | | |
EGM on 10:13 - Nov 21 with 4366 views | dingdangblue |
EGM on 22:47 - Nov 20 by 1mark1 | I know of him, but don't actually know him. I would not necessarily think he would have any influence, though he MIGHT have some input as advice, depending on his actual role. Up to about couple a months ago (around the time of Jim Dobbin's death), Dale had NOT put forward an acceptable offer to the Council. They had offered to buy the shares and clear the debt to the Council, but NOT with the FULL cash up front, basically wanting to pay over a period of time. This was MY UNDERSTANDING of what I was told. In principal the Council are/were happy to release the shares so long as Hornets have a guaranteed right to play with a contract, and the tax payers of Rochdale get a fair price/deal. From what I could understand, the Council are NOT or would not be allowed to just wipe out the Stadium company debts/loan. Also they have to obtain something that resembles a fair market price for the shares, legally. In my opinion they should get a fair price and get a proper settlement of the debt/loans, for us tax payers. |
How much of 'us' tax payers money goes into running the Stadium then each season? How much of 'us' tax payers money have we loaned to the Stadium company? | |
| |
EGM on 11:23 - Nov 21 with 4265 views | DevonDale | Why's it been called at such a stupid timne of the day - 9.00am would be much better! | | | |
EGM on 11:49 - Nov 21 with 4219 views | downunder |
EGM on 11:23 - Nov 21 by DevonDale | Why's it been called at such a stupid timne of the day - 9.00am would be much better! |
Well said! And why has it to be extraordinary? Why not just postpone and then stop having an annual one? | | | |
EGM on 11:54 - Nov 21 with 4206 views | MoonyDale |
EGM on 22:47 - Nov 20 by 1mark1 | I know of him, but don't actually know him. I would not necessarily think he would have any influence, though he MIGHT have some input as advice, depending on his actual role. Up to about couple a months ago (around the time of Jim Dobbin's death), Dale had NOT put forward an acceptable offer to the Council. They had offered to buy the shares and clear the debt to the Council, but NOT with the FULL cash up front, basically wanting to pay over a period of time. This was MY UNDERSTANDING of what I was told. In principal the Council are/were happy to release the shares so long as Hornets have a guaranteed right to play with a contract, and the tax payers of Rochdale get a fair price/deal. From what I could understand, the Council are NOT or would not be allowed to just wipe out the Stadium company debts/loan. Also they have to obtain something that resembles a fair market price for the shares, legally. In my opinion they should get a fair price and get a proper settlement of the debt/loans, for us tax payers. |
Wouldn't be the first time the council have written off a debt though would it? Haven't they already done so with a previous loan ? I stand corrected if wrong.. | |
| |
EGM on 12:59 - Nov 21 with 4070 views | KenBoon | A fair market price for the shares would be no more than £0.00. | | | |
EGM on 14:19 - Nov 21 with 3944 views | lurker |
EGM on 12:59 - Nov 21 by KenBoon | A fair market price for the shares would be no more than £0.00. |
Especially the (possibly) illegally transferred RFL shares | | | |
EGM on 14:28 - Nov 21 with 3914 views | Rosun | Are bacon butties available? | | | |
EGM on 14:39 - Nov 21 with 3894 views | Toffeemanc | What are the shares realistically actually worth? It's common knowledge that the stadium company clearly isn't a profit making business under the current model and only racks up debts. What exactly do the council have to bargain with if their share is nothing but a share of the increasing debts which they would have to pay out of tax payers money from their ever decreasing budget. As they own 10% of it surely they are responsible for 10% of the current debt approx £60-65k. Surely this debt would have to be deducted from the agreed price making the actual figure they would receive almost a nominal fee and if so why the protracted negotiations? [Post edited 21 Nov 2014 14:40]
| |
| |
EGM on 14:55 - Nov 21 with 3855 views | 100notout |
EGM on 14:39 - Nov 21 by Toffeemanc | What are the shares realistically actually worth? It's common knowledge that the stadium company clearly isn't a profit making business under the current model and only racks up debts. What exactly do the council have to bargain with if their share is nothing but a share of the increasing debts which they would have to pay out of tax payers money from their ever decreasing budget. As they own 10% of it surely they are responsible for 10% of the current debt approx £60-65k. Surely this debt would have to be deducted from the agreed price making the actual figure they would receive almost a nominal fee and if so why the protracted negotiations? [Post edited 21 Nov 2014 14:40]
|
The starting point is always the net asset position so if the total assets, i.e. effectively the ground is worth say £1m and the liabilities are say £700k then the councils shares are worth £30k (10% of £300k). As I said thats the starting point and then you have to factor in future income earning potential / losses, contingent liabilities, tax position, discounted cash flows etc etc etc. As the moment their shares are probably worth something. However as future losses accrue this equity may (possibly very quickly) disappear. Thats why its in the interests of council tax payers for the council to sell their shares and sell them NOW. If they don't the councillor is NOT acting in the best interests of the Rochdale public i.e. the electorate | |
| |
EGM on 16:20 - Nov 21 with 3753 views | ArthurDaley |
EGM on 17:14 - Nov 20 by isitme | So from the article you have linked I assume that the council are not playing nicely? Maybe someone who is on Twitter could tweet our MP and see what his reaction is? |
More than likely put a photo or two of Karen on some media site, and hope you forget what question you asked. | |
| |
EGM on 16:25 - Nov 21 with 3736 views | KenBoon |
EGM on 14:55 - Nov 21 by 100notout | The starting point is always the net asset position so if the total assets, i.e. effectively the ground is worth say £1m and the liabilities are say £700k then the councils shares are worth £30k (10% of £300k). As I said thats the starting point and then you have to factor in future income earning potential / losses, contingent liabilities, tax position, discounted cash flows etc etc etc. As the moment their shares are probably worth something. However as future losses accrue this equity may (possibly very quickly) disappear. Thats why its in the interests of council tax payers for the council to sell their shares and sell them NOW. If they don't the councillor is NOT acting in the best interests of the Rochdale public i.e. the electorate |
I don't see how the council's shares are worth a penny. The stadium is losing money and they have a minority share in it. What are they going to do? Sell some car parking spaces? | | | |
EGM on 16:31 - Nov 21 with 3719 views | nordenblue |
EGM on 16:25 - Nov 21 by KenBoon | I don't see how the council's shares are worth a penny. The stadium is losing money and they have a minority share in it. What are they going to do? Sell some car parking spaces? |
Can we not just pay the standard 10p in the pound to clear a debt? | | | |
EGM on 16:38 - Nov 21 with 3699 views | 100notout |
EGM on 16:25 - Nov 21 by KenBoon | I don't see how the council's shares are worth a penny. The stadium is losing money and they have a minority share in it. What are they going to do? Sell some car parking spaces? |
If you have a house and an estate agent tells you it is worth £250k and you have a £100k mortgage on it - how much cash would you want left after selling it? £150k? Now it might be that its got dry rot, needs new windows and a rewire, new kitchen & bathroom. It might be that your big garden is not actually yours and you need to pay a few quid every year to use it and are obliged to pay for its upkeep. Does all that mean its worthless? No. Any buyer will make a deduction for repairs and ongoing liabilities - a fair price after deducting the mortgage might be £100k. I don't know the figures re the stadium but I don't think there's any doubt that the shares are worth something - just how much thats the question / negotiation! | |
| |
EGM on 17:28 - Nov 21 with 3593 views | dingdangblue |
EGM on 14:39 - Nov 21 by Toffeemanc | What are the shares realistically actually worth? It's common knowledge that the stadium company clearly isn't a profit making business under the current model and only racks up debts. What exactly do the council have to bargain with if their share is nothing but a share of the increasing debts which they would have to pay out of tax payers money from their ever decreasing budget. As they own 10% of it surely they are responsible for 10% of the current debt approx £60-65k. Surely this debt would have to be deducted from the agreed price making the actual figure they would receive almost a nominal fee and if so why the protracted negotiations? [Post edited 21 Nov 2014 14:40]
|
The way 1mark1 states that the council aren't prepared to write off the debt indicates that the money the stadium company owes is to the council? | |
| |
EGM on 17:38 - Nov 21 with 3568 views | 1mark1 |
EGM on 11:54 - Nov 21 by MoonyDale | Wouldn't be the first time the council have written off a debt though would it? Haven't they already done so with a previous loan ? I stand corrected if wrong.. |
I don't know. Like I said, it was my understanding of the conversation, that the debt/loans could not be just wiped out-I don't know if that's the case. | |
| |
| |